Helmets cramp my style
06-16-08, 08:38 AM
#3376
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
By the way, the figure was 88%, not 80% as the top of the range provided by various studies. Can't you even get that straight when I quote it?
If you want to see a study of bike helmets which were destroyed by running them into a simulated telephone pole at 25 mph with a six mph fall, print this off:
www.datapointlabs.com/newsletter/news81web.pdf
www.datapointlabs.com/newsletter/news81web.pdf
So a helmet will not protect you completely from a 25 mph crash and concurrent 6 mph fall rate into a stationary telephone pole, which I have already acknowledged. But note that it did "...absorb a significant amount of the energy of the impact..." which is all we've been saying all along.
[quote
PS--meanwhile, calm down and stop being so angry.
[/quote]
Stop being a hypocrite. You're committed to your views, even though they're demonstrably wrong; I'm equally - well, less, as I'm willing to change my mind with data to mine.
I'm a democrate, an Obama fan, and being compared to Cheney is simply not nice. I ride a bike precisely because I regard global warming as a huge issue
06-16-08, 08:52 AM
#3377
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
By the way, the figure was 88%, not 80% as the top of the range provided by various studies. Can't you even get that straight when I quote it?
If you want to see a study of bike helmets which were destroyed by running them into a simulated telephone pole at 25 mph with a six mph fall, print this off:
www.datapointlabs.com/newsletter/news81web.pdf
www.datapointlabs.com/newsletter/news81web.pdf
So a helmet will not protect you completely from a 25 mph crash and concurrent 6 mph fall rate into a stationary telephone pole, which I have already acknowledged. But note that it did "...absorb a significant amount of the energy of the impact..." which is all we've been saying all along.
[quote
PS--meanwhile, calm down and stop being so angry.
[/quote]
You're committed to your views, even though they're demonstrably wrong - or at least built on incorrect data and reasoning. I'm equally - well, less, as I'm willing to change my mind with data to mine. Complaining that I'm "angry" and you, implicitly, are not is yet another double standard.
I'm a democrate, an Obama fan, and being compared to Cheney is simply not nice. I ride a bike precisely because I regard global warming as a huge issue
06-16-08, 01:18 PM
#3378
e-Biker
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 951
Bikes: Gary Fisher, Strong GT-S eBike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Hear hear. As I've said before, I have no doubt that all of us could get together and head out on a ride and have a great time. Don't let a difference of opinion about something quite peripheral to bicycles obscure the fact that we are all united by a love of cycling.
One unfortunate effect of this is that cyclists spend too much time squabbling over issues such as this, and not enough presenting a united front with regards to more important issues affecting cyclists. The classic 'divide and rule' tactic.
One unfortunate effect of this is that cyclists spend too much time squabbling over issues such as this, and not enough presenting a united front with regards to more important issues affecting cyclists. The classic 'divide and rule' tactic.
As for "divide and conquer", well... that's for sure. And that's one thing that I just don't get. Why would any cyclist who's concious of the risks of cycling in urban areas refuse to wear a helmet? I'd like to wear armour if it wasn't so impractical.
If such a simple thing, even if it doesn't work 100% of the time, it's at least one step in the right direction.
I'd rather look dorky like this:
Than end up like this:
06-16-08, 05:28 PM
#3379
<user defined text>
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 417
Bikes: 80's peugeot. Somewhat knackered. Lovely new Salsa Casseroll singlespeed.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
You mean you dont wear something like this?
https://www.mx1.co.uk/products-Fox-Ra..._06052-017.htm
https://www.mx1.co.uk/products-PCS-Ne...ce_pcsneck.htm
Not so impractical - people wear this stuff mtb racing. And 'some protection is better than none', right?
06-16-08, 07:01 PM
#3380
Lanky Lass
.East Hill
__________________
___________________________________________________
TRY EMPATHY & HAVE LOVE IN YOUR HEART, PERHAPS I'LL SEE YOU ON THE ROAD...
___________________________________________________
TRY EMPATHY & HAVE LOVE IN YOUR HEART, PERHAPS I'LL SEE YOU ON THE ROAD...
06-17-08, 10:33 AM
#3381
e-Biker
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 951
Bikes: Gary Fisher, Strong GT-S eBike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Moron was originally an English scientific term, coined in 1910 by psychologist Henry H. Goddard from the Greek word moros, which meant "dull" (as opposed to "sharp"), and used to describe a person with a mental age located between 8 and 12 on the Binet scale. It was once applied to people with an IQ of 51-70, being superior in one degree to "imbecile" (IQ of 26-50) and superior in two degrees to "idiot" (IQ of 0-25).
06-17-08, 12:09 PM
#3382
Senior Member
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../17/do1701.xml
Get a bike helmet to get ahead - or maybe not
By Boris Johnson
Boris Johnson makes his escape from the press in the days before he bought a cycle helmet
I came out of my house the other week and saw that it was a perfect day for cycling to work...there was something terribly wrong with my appearance. I clapped my head. My helmet! I'd forgotten to wear the symbol of my new deference to correct thinking....
...within another three seconds I would have gone back to get my helmet, and I would have fastened the chinstrap of social obedience … except that for some reason I didn't...
...the only time I have had a serious prang in almost a decade of cycling in London, a helmet would have made no difference whatever...
...But what clinched it for me that morning, as I havered on the doorstep, was the sheer loveliness of early June.
...Here, then, is the political position. In my efforts to do the right thing, I have ended up giving offence to both opposing factions. As soon as I started to wear a helmet, I was denounced as a wimp, a milquetoast, a sell-out to the elf and safety lobby, a man so cravenly attached to his own survival that he was willing to wear this undignified plastic hat.
As soon as I was pictured not wearing a helmet, I was attacked for "sending out the wrong signal" and generally poisoning the minds of the young with my own reckless behaviour.
The situation, my friends, is a mess. I have been convicted beyond all reasonable doubt of complete incoherence on the question of cycle helmets - and complete incoherence, therefore, is what I propose to defend.
In so far as I am confused between the competing imperatives of safety and liberty, it is a confusion we all share. Look at the polls.
Last week, the public was asked what it thought of the Government's plan to lock people up for 42 days without charge. Yeah! said a stonking 69 per cent of the YouGov sample. Bang 'em up. Better safe than sorry, was the message of the electorate.
This weekend, the public was asked what they thought of my friend David Davis's heroic act of auto-defenestration, and his decision to call a by-election to oppose the 42 days measure. Yeah! said the public - 69 per cent of them, according to ICM. Good on yer, David, they said. You stick up for our liberties!
Now if 69 per cent of the public is in favour of 42 days' detention without charge, and 69 per cent are in favour of David Davis and his opposition to 42 days, it is a mathematical certainty that a large chunk of the electorate is hopelessly muddled...
...As for cycle helmets, we should be allowed, in our muddled way, to make up our own minds. Sometimes we will go for hatless, sun-blessed, windswept liberty; sometimes for helmeted security.
The important thing is that we assess the risk, we make the decision, and be it on our own heads - or, in the case of my helmet, sometimes not.
Get a bike helmet to get ahead - or maybe not
By Boris Johnson
Boris Johnson makes his escape from the press in the days before he bought a cycle helmet
I came out of my house the other week and saw that it was a perfect day for cycling to work...there was something terribly wrong with my appearance. I clapped my head. My helmet! I'd forgotten to wear the symbol of my new deference to correct thinking....
...within another three seconds I would have gone back to get my helmet, and I would have fastened the chinstrap of social obedience … except that for some reason I didn't...
...the only time I have had a serious prang in almost a decade of cycling in London, a helmet would have made no difference whatever...
...But what clinched it for me that morning, as I havered on the doorstep, was the sheer loveliness of early June.
...Here, then, is the political position. In my efforts to do the right thing, I have ended up giving offence to both opposing factions. As soon as I started to wear a helmet, I was denounced as a wimp, a milquetoast, a sell-out to the elf and safety lobby, a man so cravenly attached to his own survival that he was willing to wear this undignified plastic hat.
As soon as I was pictured not wearing a helmet, I was attacked for "sending out the wrong signal" and generally poisoning the minds of the young with my own reckless behaviour.
The situation, my friends, is a mess. I have been convicted beyond all reasonable doubt of complete incoherence on the question of cycle helmets - and complete incoherence, therefore, is what I propose to defend.
In so far as I am confused between the competing imperatives of safety and liberty, it is a confusion we all share. Look at the polls.
Last week, the public was asked what it thought of the Government's plan to lock people up for 42 days without charge. Yeah! said a stonking 69 per cent of the YouGov sample. Bang 'em up. Better safe than sorry, was the message of the electorate.
This weekend, the public was asked what they thought of my friend David Davis's heroic act of auto-defenestration, and his decision to call a by-election to oppose the 42 days measure. Yeah! said the public - 69 per cent of them, according to ICM. Good on yer, David, they said. You stick up for our liberties!
Now if 69 per cent of the public is in favour of 42 days' detention without charge, and 69 per cent are in favour of David Davis and his opposition to 42 days, it is a mathematical certainty that a large chunk of the electorate is hopelessly muddled...
...As for cycle helmets, we should be allowed, in our muddled way, to make up our own minds. Sometimes we will go for hatless, sun-blessed, windswept liberty; sometimes for helmeted security.
The important thing is that we assess the risk, we make the decision, and be it on our own heads - or, in the case of my helmet, sometimes not.
Last edited by closetbiker; 06-17-08 at 06:21 PM.
06-17-08, 12:53 PM
#3383
e-Biker
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 951
Bikes: Gary Fisher, Strong GT-S eBike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../17/do1701.xml
Get a bike helmet to get ahead - or maybe not
By Boris Johnson
Boris Johnson makes his escape from the press in the days before he bought a cycle helmet
...Here, then, is the political position. In my efforts to do the right thing, I have ended up giving offence to both opposing factions. As soon as I started to wear a helmet, I was denounced as a wimp, a milquetoast, a sell-out to the elf and safety lobby, a man so cravenly attached to his own survival that he was willing to wear this undignified plastic hat.
As soon as I was pictured not wearing a helmet, I was attacked for "sending out the wrong signal" and generally poisoning the minds of the young with my own reckless behaviour.
The situation, my friends, is a mess.I have been convicted beyond all reasonable doubt of complete incoherence on the question of cycle helmets - and complete incoherence, therefore, is what I propose to defend.
In so far as I am confused between the competing imperatives of safety and liberty, it is a confusion we all share. Look at the polls.
Last week, the public was asked what it thought of the Government's plan to lock people up for 42 days without charge. Yeah! said a stonking 69 per cent of the YouGov sample. Bang 'em up. Better safe than sorry, was the message of the electorate.
This weekend, the public was asked what they thought of my friend David Davis's heroic act of auto-defenestration, and his decision to call a by-election to oppose the 42 days measure. Yeah! said the public - 69 per cent of them, according to ICM. Good on yer, David, they said. You stick up for our liberties!
Now if 69 per cent of the public is in favour of 42 days' detention without charge, and 69 per cent are in favour of David Davis and his opposition to 42 days, it is a mathematical certainty that a large chunk of the electorate is hopelessly muddled...
...As for cycle helmets, we should be allowed, in our muddled way, to make up our own minds. Sometimes we will go for hatless, sun-blessed, windswept liberty; sometimes for helmeted security.
The important thing is that we assess the risk, we make the decision, and be it on our own heads - or, in the case of my helmet, sometimes not.
Get a bike helmet to get ahead - or maybe not
By Boris Johnson
Boris Johnson makes his escape from the press in the days before he bought a cycle helmet
...Here, then, is the political position. In my efforts to do the right thing, I have ended up giving offence to both opposing factions. As soon as I started to wear a helmet, I was denounced as a wimp, a milquetoast, a sell-out to the elf and safety lobby, a man so cravenly attached to his own survival that he was willing to wear this undignified plastic hat.
As soon as I was pictured not wearing a helmet, I was attacked for "sending out the wrong signal" and generally poisoning the minds of the young with my own reckless behaviour.
The situation, my friends, is a mess.I have been convicted beyond all reasonable doubt of complete incoherence on the question of cycle helmets - and complete incoherence, therefore, is what I propose to defend.
In so far as I am confused between the competing imperatives of safety and liberty, it is a confusion we all share. Look at the polls.
Last week, the public was asked what it thought of the Government's plan to lock people up for 42 days without charge. Yeah! said a stonking 69 per cent of the YouGov sample. Bang 'em up. Better safe than sorry, was the message of the electorate.
This weekend, the public was asked what they thought of my friend David Davis's heroic act of auto-defenestration, and his decision to call a by-election to oppose the 42 days measure. Yeah! said the public - 69 per cent of them, according to ICM. Good on yer, David, they said. You stick up for our liberties!
Now if 69 per cent of the public is in favour of 42 days' detention without charge, and 69 per cent are in favour of David Davis and his opposition to 42 days, it is a mathematical certainty that a large chunk of the electorate is hopelessly muddled...
...As for cycle helmets, we should be allowed, in our muddled way, to make up our own minds. Sometimes we will go for hatless, sun-blessed, windswept liberty; sometimes for helmeted security.
The important thing is that we assess the risk, we make the decision, and be it on our own heads - or, in the case of my helmet, sometimes not.
06-22-08, 09:26 AM
#3384
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
By the way, the figure was 88%, not 80% as the top of the range provided by various studies. Can't you even get that straight when I quote it?
If you want to see a study of bike helmets which were destroyed by running them into a simulated telephone pole at 25 mph with a six mph fall, print this off: www.datapointlabs.com/newsletter/news81web.pdf
So a helmet will not protect you completely from a 25 mph crash and concurrent 6 mph fall rate into a stationary telephone pole, which I have already acknowledged. But note that it did "...absorb a significant amount of the energy of the impact..." which is all we've been saying all along.
PS--meanwhile, calm down and stop being so angry.
I'm a democrate, an Obama fan, and being compared to Cheney is simply not nice. I ride a bike precisely because I regard global warming as a huge issue
Last edited by meanwhile; 06-22-08 at 09:45 AM.
06-22-08, 09:31 AM
#3385
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
06-22-08, 04:52 PM
#3387
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Coventry, UK
Posts: 109
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I've not worn a helmet since I managed to drop mine from my handlebars getting ready to head out, where it landed and promptly split in two.
Helmets are not rated for higher speed impacts, they are designed for relatively low speeds. Great for young kids learning to ride, great for off road'ers who might land on their backs at any moment from relatively low speeds.
No so great if you're going beyond the speed rating of your helmet, or are hit by someone going faster than it's rated for.
Wear a helmet, don't wear a helmet. Should be upto the person on the bike. No one else.
Helmets are not rated for higher speed impacts, they are designed for relatively low speeds. Great for young kids learning to ride, great for off road'ers who might land on their backs at any moment from relatively low speeds.
No so great if you're going beyond the speed rating of your helmet, or are hit by someone going faster than it's rated for.
Wear a helmet, don't wear a helmet. Should be upto the person on the bike. No one else.
06-22-08, 05:32 PM
#3388
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
However, googling his allegation did lead me to this great article:
Oh - btw: Johnson did steal something, a cigar box belonging to Saddam's butt monkey, Tariq Aziz. Which standard of stealing makes almost the entire occupation force and every visiting VIP thieves - everyone grabbed a bayonet or something with Saddam's face on as a souvenir. I doubt even Zr is petty enough , or pro-Saddam enough, to care about this, so my money is still on his being utterly confused.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../02/do0201.xml
Swifter than eagles. And stolen
By Boris Johnson
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 02/08/2007
Have your say Read comments
First there was shock. Then there was grief. Then rage. There was a moment of shock when I rounded the corner the other night because, no matter how often it has happened to you, it is always a gulp-making thing to look at the railings where you left your bike, and see that for the seventh time in as many years some cowardly little fiend has used a combination of violence and ingenuity to steal it.
There was grief as I remembered what a lovely bike it was. It was swifter than eagles, it was stronger than lions. It was a silver-grey Marin Sausalito with featherlight wishbone struts and, with tyres pumped and a following wind, it was a two-wheeled Desert Orchid, capable of surging from Highbury to the House of Commons in less than 20 minutes.
And after the mourning the rage kicked in: rage at the epidemic of bike theft that is gripping London and the rest of the country - and rage at our society for the lax, passive, apathetic way in which we are dealing with that epidemic.
advertisement
We treat bike theft as though it were a kind of natural event, like catching a cold or succumbing to some other morally neutral phenomenon.
When someone's bicycle is stolen the discussion is entirely about what he or she could have done to prevent it. The police talk about the need for tougher locks, and special serial numbers, and the cycling experts give out various bits of anti-theft advice. Don't have a bike that's too flash, they say. Try painting it some depressing colour, like orange or purple. Try having a basket at the front, they say, or mudguards, or anything to make your bike look a bit grungy and unappealing.
All of which advice may be well meant, but somehow makes me pop with rage, because we seem continually to be ascribing responsibility for the event to the victim, and ignoring the critical point. It wasn't some supernatural agency that nicked your bike, or nicked my bike. It wasn't oompa-loompas or fairies or bike elves. It was thieves.
It was a bunch of cynical little sods who don't care a toss for private property, and it so happens that, on this occasion, I had taken just about every possible precaution. It was no ordinary lock I used to immobilise my machine: it was a huge steel thing made in Germany, as thick as a baby's arm, and I locked it to some railings and, as I stood back to admire my handiwork, I noted that both were far too thick to saw through.
So what did they do? They uprooted a large stake that was being used to encourage the growth of some sapling, and they jemmied it into the railings and heaved and heaved until they snapped the bar, and then scarpered with my bike and left their wreckage contemptuously on the pavement; and yes, it is true that this city needs more Sheffield stands to park our bikes, but you ought to be able to lock your bike to London railings, with a drop-forged German mega-lock, and not come back to find that someone has nicked it with an audacity that can only be described as insolent.
There were 80,000 bicycle thefts in London last year, and that figure is probably a gross underestimate. Why? Let me quote the words of a passer-by who came upon me, as the emotions of shock-grief-rage were flashing across my face like a traffic light. "*******s!" he said. "That happened to me last year, but it's no use reporting it to the police, because they won't do a thing about it."
And even if he is wrong, even if there is occasionally an effort to take bike theft seriously, you can see - on the face of it - why the police do not put it top of their priorities. The scale of the problem is appalling. There are only a million regular cyclists in this country, and yet there were 439,000 bicycles stolen last year, and that is just the ones reported stolen. One cycling expert told me he sometimes hoped the thieves would just give up in exhaustion, overwhelmed by the scale of their booty, unable to find any more punters for their ripped-off merchandise.
But they don't give up: the internet offers huge new markets; Brick Lane is bursting on a Sunday. The plunder intensifies, and every bike stolen is not just a bout of shock-grief-rage for the victim; every theft is a deterrent to cycling, since it is estimated that 25 per cent of victims decide not to bother investing in a new bicycle.
These are dismal statistics, and yet for the victims of bike theft the police seem to take the attitude of the Amsterdam cops played by Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse: they have solved the problem by decriminalising it.
Suppose they were to find a 15-year-old in possession of my Marin Sausalito, or a roomful of Marin Sausalitos. What could the perp expect? A caution? A stiff talking-to? Some unenforceable ASBO? The double-standards are unbearable, because we all know perfectly law-abiding citizens who have allowed their offside front wheel to stray an inch outside the white line of the residents' parking bay and boom!
Their car is towed away by the state, and they can end up paying hundreds of pounds to get it back. But when a thief nicks your bicycle, the state just seems to shrug its shoulders and advise you to get more locks. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could change the odds, and wipe the confident smirk off the faces of these varmints? Isn't it time we investigated the uses of new cheap tracking technology, to fill these thieves with the terror of getting caught? Wouldn't it be fine to hunt down the middlemen - often drug-dealers - who encourage kids to go on their nicking sprees?
It would be a huge advance for civility and decency on the streets, because little crimes lead to greater crimes, and if you can casually smash a railing to steal a bike, then you are well on the way to burglary and worse. Decoy bikes will be part of the answer; but the first step is to recondition society to grasp this elementary fact, that the problem is not caused by bad locks or weak railings. It's caused by thieves, and they need to be deterred.
Swifter than eagles. And stolen
By Boris Johnson
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 02/08/2007
Have your say Read comments
First there was shock. Then there was grief. Then rage. There was a moment of shock when I rounded the corner the other night because, no matter how often it has happened to you, it is always a gulp-making thing to look at the railings where you left your bike, and see that for the seventh time in as many years some cowardly little fiend has used a combination of violence and ingenuity to steal it.
There was grief as I remembered what a lovely bike it was. It was swifter than eagles, it was stronger than lions. It was a silver-grey Marin Sausalito with featherlight wishbone struts and, with tyres pumped and a following wind, it was a two-wheeled Desert Orchid, capable of surging from Highbury to the House of Commons in less than 20 minutes.
And after the mourning the rage kicked in: rage at the epidemic of bike theft that is gripping London and the rest of the country - and rage at our society for the lax, passive, apathetic way in which we are dealing with that epidemic.
advertisement
We treat bike theft as though it were a kind of natural event, like catching a cold or succumbing to some other morally neutral phenomenon.
When someone's bicycle is stolen the discussion is entirely about what he or she could have done to prevent it. The police talk about the need for tougher locks, and special serial numbers, and the cycling experts give out various bits of anti-theft advice. Don't have a bike that's too flash, they say. Try painting it some depressing colour, like orange or purple. Try having a basket at the front, they say, or mudguards, or anything to make your bike look a bit grungy and unappealing.
All of which advice may be well meant, but somehow makes me pop with rage, because we seem continually to be ascribing responsibility for the event to the victim, and ignoring the critical point. It wasn't some supernatural agency that nicked your bike, or nicked my bike. It wasn't oompa-loompas or fairies or bike elves. It was thieves.
It was a bunch of cynical little sods who don't care a toss for private property, and it so happens that, on this occasion, I had taken just about every possible precaution. It was no ordinary lock I used to immobilise my machine: it was a huge steel thing made in Germany, as thick as a baby's arm, and I locked it to some railings and, as I stood back to admire my handiwork, I noted that both were far too thick to saw through.
So what did they do? They uprooted a large stake that was being used to encourage the growth of some sapling, and they jemmied it into the railings and heaved and heaved until they snapped the bar, and then scarpered with my bike and left their wreckage contemptuously on the pavement; and yes, it is true that this city needs more Sheffield stands to park our bikes, but you ought to be able to lock your bike to London railings, with a drop-forged German mega-lock, and not come back to find that someone has nicked it with an audacity that can only be described as insolent.
There were 80,000 bicycle thefts in London last year, and that figure is probably a gross underestimate. Why? Let me quote the words of a passer-by who came upon me, as the emotions of shock-grief-rage were flashing across my face like a traffic light. "*******s!" he said. "That happened to me last year, but it's no use reporting it to the police, because they won't do a thing about it."
And even if he is wrong, even if there is occasionally an effort to take bike theft seriously, you can see - on the face of it - why the police do not put it top of their priorities. The scale of the problem is appalling. There are only a million regular cyclists in this country, and yet there were 439,000 bicycles stolen last year, and that is just the ones reported stolen. One cycling expert told me he sometimes hoped the thieves would just give up in exhaustion, overwhelmed by the scale of their booty, unable to find any more punters for their ripped-off merchandise.
But they don't give up: the internet offers huge new markets; Brick Lane is bursting on a Sunday. The plunder intensifies, and every bike stolen is not just a bout of shock-grief-rage for the victim; every theft is a deterrent to cycling, since it is estimated that 25 per cent of victims decide not to bother investing in a new bicycle.
These are dismal statistics, and yet for the victims of bike theft the police seem to take the attitude of the Amsterdam cops played by Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse: they have solved the problem by decriminalising it.
Suppose they were to find a 15-year-old in possession of my Marin Sausalito, or a roomful of Marin Sausalitos. What could the perp expect? A caution? A stiff talking-to? Some unenforceable ASBO? The double-standards are unbearable, because we all know perfectly law-abiding citizens who have allowed their offside front wheel to stray an inch outside the white line of the residents' parking bay and boom!
Their car is towed away by the state, and they can end up paying hundreds of pounds to get it back. But when a thief nicks your bicycle, the state just seems to shrug its shoulders and advise you to get more locks. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could change the odds, and wipe the confident smirk off the faces of these varmints? Isn't it time we investigated the uses of new cheap tracking technology, to fill these thieves with the terror of getting caught? Wouldn't it be fine to hunt down the middlemen - often drug-dealers - who encourage kids to go on their nicking sprees?
It would be a huge advance for civility and decency on the streets, because little crimes lead to greater crimes, and if you can casually smash a railing to steal a bike, then you are well on the way to burglary and worse. Decoy bikes will be part of the answer; but the first step is to recondition society to grasp this elementary fact, that the problem is not caused by bad locks or weak railings. It's caused by thieves, and they need to be deterred.
06-26-08, 06:32 PM
#3389
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 122
Bikes: Trek 7100
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I don't like wearing a helmet. But one never knows when some kid might be watching. I'd rather wear the helmet and set a good example.
07-01-08, 09:30 AM
#3390
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Just outside Kitchener, Ontario
Posts: 623
Bikes: Nishiki Continental, Bilenky custom travel tinker, home built winter bike based on Nashbar cross frrame
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I have worn a helmet regularly for well over 25 years. Ever since I used one. I think I still have that one as a souvenir.
To the poster whose helmet split in two when it fell, it was either past its useful life (yes they have a lifetime) or defective in the first place.
To the poster whose helmet split in two when it fell, it was either past its useful life (yes they have a lifetime) or defective in the first place.
07-01-08, 03:48 PM
#3391
Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Southwark, London, UK
Posts: 38
Bikes: Ridgeback 7000
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Last edited by jrafael; 07-01-08 at 03:53 PM.
07-01-08, 04:59 PM
#3393
Warning:Mild Peril
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Seattle Refugee in Los Angeles
Posts: 3,170
Bikes: Cilo, Surly Pacer, Kona Fire Mountain w/Bob Trailer, Scattante
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
ANCHORAGE, Alaska: A 14-year-old girl riding in a 24-hour mountain bike race was attacked by a bear in the middle of the night and severely injured, but was able to make a brief emergency phone call that resulted in her rescue.
The girl suffered head, neck, torso and leg wounds.
She underwent surgery and was in critical condition at Providence Alaska Medical Centre, police said.
The attack occurred along a trail in a 24-hour race organised by the Arctic Bicycle Club in Bicentennial Park.
Rescuers had to hike in more than 3km to reach the girl.
Wild animals - from grizzly and black bears to moose, wolves and wolverines - frequent the area. The girl was attacked as she reached a trail.
About 60 riders were entered in the race - a circular route that followed trails used by hikers, bikers and skiers.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game wildlife biologist Rick Sinnott told the Anchorage Daily News the bear could have been a mother that had charged two runners on a nearby trail two weeks ago.
Mr Sinnott said the girl was fortunate to be wearing a bike helmet because the bear had bitten her head.
The animal attacked the girl about 1.30am, during the darkest part of the night.
The girl called emergency services, and dispatchers heard someone struggling to breathe.
She whispered one word - "bear" - and the line went dead. Following procedure for when an emergency call is cut off, dispatchers called the number back. Another rider heard the phone ringing, stopped to investigate and spotted the girl off the trail.
That rider picked up the phone and spoke to the police. Police officers with shotguns accompanied medics to retrieve the girl.
AP
The girl suffered head, neck, torso and leg wounds.
She underwent surgery and was in critical condition at Providence Alaska Medical Centre, police said.
The attack occurred along a trail in a 24-hour race organised by the Arctic Bicycle Club in Bicentennial Park.
Rescuers had to hike in more than 3km to reach the girl.
Wild animals - from grizzly and black bears to moose, wolves and wolverines - frequent the area. The girl was attacked as she reached a trail.
About 60 riders were entered in the race - a circular route that followed trails used by hikers, bikers and skiers.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game wildlife biologist Rick Sinnott told the Anchorage Daily News the bear could have been a mother that had charged two runners on a nearby trail two weeks ago.
Mr Sinnott said the girl was fortunate to be wearing a bike helmet because the bear had bitten her head.
The animal attacked the girl about 1.30am, during the darkest part of the night.
The girl called emergency services, and dispatchers heard someone struggling to breathe.
She whispered one word - "bear" - and the line went dead. Following procedure for when an emergency call is cut off, dispatchers called the number back. Another rider heard the phone ringing, stopped to investigate and spotted the girl off the trail.
That rider picked up the phone and spoke to the police. Police officers with shotguns accompanied medics to retrieve the girl.
AP
__________________
Non semper erit aestas.
Non semper erit aestas.
07-01-08, 05:30 PM
#3394
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,401
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times
in
13 Posts
I'd personally rather have a gun. But if you think your helmet will save you from bear attacks, have at it. Wonder if they'll also solve global warming?
07-01-08, 05:32 PM
#3395
Warning:Mild Peril
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Seattle Refugee in Los Angeles
Posts: 3,170
Bikes: Cilo, Surly Pacer, Kona Fire Mountain w/Bob Trailer, Scattante
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Anyways, bear spray is better at repelling a bear attack than a handgun.
__________________
Non semper erit aestas.
Non semper erit aestas.
07-01-08, 06:23 PM
#3396
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,401
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times
in
13 Posts
So you've used both a statistically valid number of times?
Or is this just more stuff you've heard somewhere and like to believe because it fits your ideology?
Regardless, it's hard to understand why you need either, when your magic helmet protects you from all harm!
Or is this just more stuff you've heard somewhere and like to believe because it fits your ideology?
Regardless, it's hard to understand why you need either, when your magic helmet protects you from all harm!
Last edited by Six jours; 07-01-08 at 06:30 PM.
07-01-08, 06:56 PM
#3397
Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Southwark, London, UK
Posts: 38
Bikes: Ridgeback 7000
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Here are some statistic to show how unsafe can be certain things
More kids killed by guns in US in single year than total Iraq war casualties
Dangers of Mini Blind Cords
Drowning Prevention
My helmet saved my life - Warning Gory pictures !!!
Quote from Bell's Bike helmet owner's manual
"Wear Bike Helmets on Bicycles – Not on Playgrounds
Children should always wear helmets while riding their bikes. But when a child
gets off the bike, the helmet must be removed. There is a hidden hazard of
strangulation if a child wears a helmet while playing on playground equipment.
Parents
A helmet is NOT a toy. DO NOT allow your children to play with it. They can
accidentally damage it or hurt themselves."
This is about using the right equipment properly and the benefits that this can offer, safety locked gun, short blind cords, proper storage of household chemicals ( bleach, ammonia, etc)....
Head Injuries Increase Dramatically After Motorcycle Helmet Law Repeal
Last edited by jrafael; 07-01-08 at 08:22 PM.
07-01-08, 08:50 PM
#3398
Warning:Mild Peril
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Seattle Refugee in Los Angeles
Posts: 3,170
Bikes: Cilo, Surly Pacer, Kona Fire Mountain w/Bob Trailer, Scattante
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
So your pro gun and anti helmet, what a surprise. I can't imagine your insights into drinking and driving.
But, for the record, I didn't say anything about helmets. I posted a story about a biker being protected by their helmet on a helmet thread on a biking forum. Otherwise known as relevant. Where as your frothing at the mouth about strawman magic helmets and your favorite topic of handguns.
Since you aren't up on the reading, this is what I was referring to:
https://www.adn.com/news/alaska/newsr...ry/356411.html
__________________
Non semper erit aestas.
Non semper erit aestas.